The decision of the 5th Criminal Chamber of the Tunis Court of First Instance to postpone the hearing of the verdict in the case of the assassination of martyr Chokri Belaïd until February 23 is irreproachable in that it involves no procedural defect, first deputy public prosecutor at the Counter-Terrorism Judicial Division Aymen Chtiba told TAP on Tuesday.
Even more, he added, the said decision had been handed down in compliance with both the letter and the spirit of the provisions of the code of criminal procedure.
Earlier in the day, deence team member Imen Bejaoui indicated to TAP that there was a procedural flaw in the case regarding the appointment of a second lawyer to represent defendant Mohamed Amine Guesmi.
In this case, he said, the president of the criminal chamber had failed to contact the regional section of the Bar Association to request the appointment of a lawyer, adding that this conduct is procedurally flawed because it violated the decree-law governing the legal profession.
Referring t
o the reasons for the postponement, Chtiba said that at the hearing on February 16, and at the request of defendant Mohamed Amine Guesmi, the court had automatically appointed a lawyer to represent him in the case, after he had decided at the hearing to give up his lawyer.
The court’s decision is procedurally sound in that it literally reproduces the provisions of Article 141 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he considered.
This article provides as follows: “The assistance of a lawyer is compulsory before the court of first instance when ruling on a crime and also before the criminal division of the court of appeal. If the accused does not choose a lawyer, the president shall appoint one automatically.”
Source: Agence Tunis Afrique Presse